Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, President Union for Reform Judaism and other ignoramuses who spew complete fiction about Islam.
- There exists in this country among all Americans – whether Jews, Christians, or non-believers – a huge and profound ignorance about Islam.
That much is beyond dispute. But a few of us are trying to do something about it. We have listened to Islam’s spokesmen, and we have read Allah’s word and Muhammad’s traditions. We have even delved into Islamic law to see what Islam is all about. Everyone should do the same instead of pontificating from the ivory tower of ignorance.
- …there is no shortage of voices prepared to tell us that fanaticism and intolerance are fundamental to Islamic religion, and that violence and even suicide bombing have deep Koranic roots…
Rabbi Yoffie implies that:
- fanaticism is not fundamental to Islam
- intolerance is not fundamental to Islam
- Islam is a religion
- violence does not have deep Koranic roots.
- Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was a fanatic.
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, “By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya’ (army-unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause. By Him in Whose Hands my life is! I would love to be martyred in Al1ah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.
Whom do Muslims emulate?
By the declaration of the second part of the Muslim shahada (witness), which is “ash-hadu anna Muhammad rasool Allah” (Muhammad is the messenger of Allah), a Muslim vows to accept Muhammad (pbuh) as his role model in life. If the Qur’an is the Word of God, the model life led by Muhammad is its practical expression. That means a Muslim has to actualize the commands and prohibitions of God given in the Qur’an by following in all the areas of life, Allah’s Messenger, Muhammad (pbuh).
3:85 And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. 98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur’ân and Prophet Muhammad ) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
9:30 And the Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh’s Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!
- Islam is not a religion. Islam is a war machine camouflaged with a thin veil of false faith fabricated for the purpose of motivating murderers and camouflaging their intent. This fact is fully documented in Has Islam Been Hijacked?
- 2:216 makes Jihad mandatory, not optional. “Jihad is ordained for you.” 2:190…193 give us a few hints. …”fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you”…”kill them wherever you find them”…”fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allâh (Alone).”… Read the translator’s note on 2:190 at the bottom of the page. 8:39 and 9:29 are fight until loops, declaring unremitting war upon pagans, Jews & Christians respectively. Unfortunately, they are also the basis of Islamic law, which I quote from The Reliance of The Traveler, a widely accepted handbook of Fiqh.
The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o-11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29)…
Jews & Christians are the worst of creatures, to be burned; Allah curses them. <sarcasm> No sign of intolerance at all! </sarcasm>
- How did it happen that Christian fundamentalists, such as Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham, make vicious and public attacks against your religious tradition?
It happened this way: Robertson & Graham accurately described Islam’s tradition! I refer you to Sahih Bukhari’s books of Jihad & Khumus. Those books describe Islam’s traditions: what Muhammad did and said on and about the battlefield.
- How did it happen that a member of Congress, Tom Tancredo, now running for President, calls for the bombing of Mecca and Medina?
It happened this way: Congressman Tancredo was briefed on the terrorist threats and decided that we need a deterrent. He called for targeting Mecca if we are nuked because no other deterrent is possible against those who seek martyrdom.
- As a Jew I know that our sacred texts, including the Hebrew Bible, are filled with contradictory propositions, and these include passages that appear to promote violence and thus offend our ethical sensibilities. Such texts are to be found in all religions, including Christianity and Islam.
Only Islamic scripture sanctifies & mandates Jihad, genocide & terrorism with clear, direct, open ended outcome based commands.
I previously cited Reliance of The Traveler. Now I will cite Al-Shafii, a prominent Islamic Jurist.
Al-Shafi’i (God have mercy on him) said: “The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims’ interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse.” He said: “If he did not undertake the sending of enough troops to fight, those who are absent (must) go out, and consider as an obligation that which God (who is praised) said.”
Do not take my word for this! Do not believe anyone who claims to be an expert! Go to the sources; hear it from the ass’s mouth! Click the hyper links in this article and read the source documents. Above all, never believe any damn fool Dhimmi who assures you that “Islam is a religion of peace.”!
In celebration of 4 July 1776
“Our cause is noble; it is the cause of mankind!” —George Washington
INDEPENDENCE DAY 2007
Our Lives, our Fortunes, our sacred Honor
Our nation began with these stirring words in the Declaration of Independence: “When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” Now, 231 years later, they still ring true.
We may envision the Founders as rash, rowdy rebels. Not so. Already accomplished in fields of endeavor, they were settled in character and reputation. They deemed their decision necessary, and their first thought was of “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.” They were men of purpose and principle, who well understood the peril of choosing to declare independence from Great Britain. Dr. Benjamin Rush wrote to John Adams, “Do you recollect the pensive and awful silence which pervaded the House when we were called up, one after another, to the table of the President of Congress to subscribe to what was believed by many at that time to be our death warrants?”
The Founders reasoned that the colonials were compelled to the separation, outlining a detailed list of particulars describing the King of Great Britain’s “long train of abuses and usurpations” that could end only in an intended “absolute despotism” and “establishment of absolute tyranny over these states.” They appealed that the free citizens they represented therefore had both a right and a duty “to alter their former systems of government” and “to provide new guards for their future security.”
They further explained, “In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” They had been patient, measured and restrained in responding to the incursions on their freedoms but could be so no longer.
The central passage of the Declaration’s opening is the document’s most famous, suggesting the form of government truly fit for a free people: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
The Founders sought liberty, not license—rather than a loosening of restraints, a freedom to pursue right. The objective was citizens’ safety and happiness, later called “the common defense,” “the general welfare,” and the “blessings of liberty.” The mottos of the American Revolution were “No King but King Jesus!” and “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.”
Given their experiences with a leader who had violated the laws supposed to control his own conduct as much as theirs, the Founders sought to avoid the instability of democracy or of oligarchy, in which one or a handful of people can overturn the foundations by a simple vote or decree. Fisher Ames warned, “The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.” John Witherspoon referred to pure democracy as “very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.” The Founders ultimately chose a constitutional democratic republic—based on the foundation of the reliable rule of law, responsive to the people’s “consent of the governed” through representation of the citizens, predicated on the virtue of the people.
The colonists came to these shores with a learned tradition of liberty, and this new land offered a manner of living that further taught freedom. Our performance in upholding this heritage is mixed. We are divided as a nation, no longer pressing toward unity and allegiance to shared principles. Facile commentary lauds comity as the antidote for what the Founders derided as faction, applauding the elitist establishment fetish for bipartisanship. But they are exactly wrong. Indeed, bipartisanship today is more akin to factionalism than are those adhering to the two major political parties out of principle.
There remains one crucial question: What are we willing to risk to salvage the heritage our Founders handed down to us? Our warriors in the field have demonstrated that they stand in the direct line from our Patriot Founders—prepared to sacrifice all in service. Many activist citizens gave time, effort and resources to turn aside the Senate’s recent attempts to foist a dangerous change in immigration laws on the nation. But the United States as a nation is not as secure as at its tenuous beginnings.
The signers of the Declaration concluded their treatise, “We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States… And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” Do we citizens, inheritors of the Republic bequeathed us, still stand ready to hazard even half so much?
Quote of the week
“A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.” —Samuel Adams
“The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling which they overburden the inferior number is a shilling saved to their own pockets.”
— James Madison (Federalist No. 10, 23 November 1787)